John writes that it's pointless to try to forbid registrars from warehousing names, since there's no way to enforce such a rule. I think we have an added problem here that needs to be addressed... recently we were treated to an outstanding example of institutional self-dealing when ICANN (in order to settle a lawsuit and to ensure a major source of funding for itself) increased .com registry pricing. If the board has no apparent problem with self-dealing activities, it will assuredly be a matter of some difficulty to convince a majority of the board to have registrar or registry self-dealing activities curtailed. Is there a way to enforce self-dealing rules? Perhaps... if registry and/or registrar contracts stipulate that self-dealing transactions will result in a loss of accreditation. ...but again, ICANN has long been reluctant to use this option. ICANN takes the view that "For example, if a registrar fails to comply with the requirements of a consensus policy or fails to comply with the RAA requirement to maintain registration data, these are quite serious contract breaches; however, they do not necessarily warrant contract termination." -- http://sanjuan2007.icann.org/files/sanjuan/EnforcementTools.pdf We'll have to take a look at the language in the proposed graduated sanctions amendment to the RAA to see what exactly our options might be. Unfortunately, the specific language of the proposed RAA revisions are not due to be released for comment for another 30-60 days. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping